Clinical and radiographic results of crestal vs. subcrestal placement of implants in posterior areas: A split‐mouth randomized controlled clinical trial

Abstract

AbstractObjectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate the peri‐implant soft tissue and marginal bone loss (MBL) around implants with platform‐switching and internal conical connection placed at crestal and subcrestal levels in posterior areas.Materials and methodsNineteen partially edentulous patients with at least two adjacent missing teeth in posterior areas unilaterally or bilaterally were included. Forty‐two implants were placed randomly at the crestal or subcrestal (1 mm) level in a split‐mouth design. Implant‐supported fixed dental prostheses with screw retention were delivered after 4 months of healing. Clinical and radiological measurements were performed at implant placement (T0), restoration delivery (T1), and 1‐year follow‐up after loading (T2). MBL was calculated as the change in distance from the implant‐abutment interface to the first radiographically visible bone‐implant contact. A repeated‐measures mixed ANOVA followed by a paired Student's t‐test with the Bonferroni correction was used for statistical analysis. p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.ResultsEighteen patients with thirty‐eight implants completed the study at T2. The MBL was lower in the subcrestal group than in the crestal group (0.04 ± 0.08 vs. 0.17 ± 0.17 mm, p = 0.004). The peri‐implant probing depth (PD) was 2.31 ± 0.48 mm in the subcrestal group and 1.92 ± 0.43 mm in the crestal group; this difference was statistically significant (p = 0.002). Intragroup comparison showed no significant differences in MBL, or PD around the crestal group and subcrestal group from T1 to T2.ConclusionAfter 1 year of functional loading, subcrestal placement of implants with platform‐switching and internal conical connection showed lower MBL and was associated with greater PD and peri‐implant soft tissue height than implants placed at the crestal level.